GOD, THE GOOD, AND UTILITARIANISM Is ethics about happiness? Aristotle thought so and for centuries Christians agreed, until utilitarianism raised worries about where this would lead. In this volume, Peter Singer, leading utilitarian philosopher and controversial defender of infanticide and euthanasia, addresses this question in conversation with Christian ethicists and secular utilitarians. Their engagement reveals surprising points of agree- ment and difference on questions of moral theory, the history of ethics, and current issues such as climate change, abortion, poverty and animal rights. The volume explores the advantages and pitfalls of basing morality on happiness; if ethics is teleological, is its proper aim the subjective satisfaction of preferences? Or is human flourishing found in objective goods: friendship, intellectual curiosity, meaningful labour? This volume provides a timely review of how utilitarians and Christians conceive of the good, and will be of great interest to those studying religious ethics, philosophy of religion, and applied ethics. john perry is Lecturer in Theological Ethics at the University of St Andrews, and formerly McDonald Fellow for Christian Ethics & Public Life at the University of Oxford. He is the author of The Pretenses of Loyalty (2011). GOD, THE GOOD, AND UTILITARIANISM Perspectives on Peter Singer edited by JOHN PERRY University Printing House, Cambridge cb28bs, United Kingdom Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge. It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence. www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107050754 © Cambridge University Press, 2014 Chapter 2 ‘Engaging with Christianity’ © Peter Singer, 2014 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2014 Printed in the United Kingdom by Clays, St Ives plc A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data God, the good, and utilitarianism : perspectives on Peter Singer / edited by John Perry. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 978-1-107-05075-4 1. Singer, Peter, 1946– 2. Utilitarianism. 3. Good and evil. 4. Christian ethics. I. Perry, John, 1976– editor of compilation. b5704.s554g63 2013 1710.5–dc23 2013032792 isbn 978-1-107-05075-4 Hardback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. It is a special object of the present work to avoid all hasty and premature reconciliations, and to exhibit fairly the divergence of the different methods without extenuation or exaggeration. Henry Sidgwick, The Methods of Ethics Contents Contributors page ix Acknowledgements x Introduction 1 John Perry part i framing the debate 13 1 Where did utilitarianism come from? 15 John Perry 2 Engaging with Christianity 53 Peter Singer 3 Engaging with Peter Singer 68 Charles C. Camosy part ii theoretical issues 91 4 Morality, happiness, and Peter Singer 93 John Hare 5 Moral reason, community belonging, and global justice 104 Lisa Sowle Cahill 6 Acts or rules? The fine-tuning of utilitarianism 125 Brad Hooker vii viii Contents part iii practical issues 139 7 What is good for the distant future? The challenge of climate change for utilitarianism 141 Tim Mulgan 8 How to respect other animals: lessons for theology from Peter Singer and vice versa 160 David Clough 9 Global poverty and the demands of morality 177 Toby Ord 10 Remember the poor: duties, dilemmas, and vocation 192 Eric Gregory Bibliography 209 Index 219 Contributors lisa sowle cahill, J. Donald Monan Professor of Theology, Boston College charles c. camosy, Assistant Professor of Christian Ethics, Fordham University david clough, Professor of Theological Ethics, University of Chester eric gregory, Professor of Religion, Princeton University john hare, Noah Porter Professor of Philosophical Theology, Yale Divinity School brad hooker, Professor of Philosophy, University of Reading tim mulgan, Professor of Philosophy, University of Auckland; Professor of Moral & Political Philosophy, University of St Andrews toby ord, Research Fellow in Philosophy, University of Oxford john perry, Lecturer in Theological Ethics, University of St Andrews; McDonald Fellow for Christian Ethics & Public Life, University of Oxford peter singer, University Center for Human Values, Princeton University; School of Historical & Philosophical Studies, University of Melbourne ix Acknowledgements This book was a collaborative effort of the McDonald Centre for Theology, Ethics & Public Life. Neither the book nor the Centre itself would exist without the support of Alonzo McDonald, whose generosity and vision made both possible. Al is someone who proves that the art of patronage did not go out of style in the renaissance, and thank God for that. Indeed, he is the model patron: engaged and interested, but also trusting and empowering. The conference from which this book emerged was held in May 2011 at Christ Church, University of Oxford. It was made possible by a grant from the British Academy and the ongoing support of the McDonald Agape Foundation. Many people made the conference possible in ways other than financial. The idea of bringing Peter Singer’s moral philosophy into conversation with Christian moral theology came originally from my long-time friend, Charles Camosy. Virginia Dunn was the administrative coordinator for the entire event; without her efficiency and organization, the conference would have lacked speakers, attendees, lunch, and wine. Nigel Biggar, who directs the McDonald Centre, provided wise guidance throughout. The book is dedicated to all my friends, colleagues, and students in Oxford, with thanks for five unforgettable years. x Introduction John Perry If you have only ever heard one criticism of utilitarianism, it is likely the charge that utilitarianism permits what is morally abhorrent: torturing an innocent person to entertain a large crowd, for example. With such possi- bilities in mind, some philosophers dismiss all consequentialist theories of 1 ethics as unworthy of consideration and on their way to extinction. Others, often utilitarians themselves, suggest that this willingness to do the abhor- rent should redound to the theory’s credit: utilitarians are simply those brave enough to bite the bullet and follow their principles, wherever they lead. Put simply, we often assume that the issue with utilitarianism is that it overrides common moral rules or intuitions. This book concerns a quite different facet of utilitarianism: its under- standing of the good. In recent years there has been a renewed interest in basing ethics on what is good – on what leads to happiness and well-being, rather than on duty, rules, or rights. The causes for this are various. One cause is that, among religious ethicists, there has been a return to virtue, occasioned by a growing discontent with those modern moral theories based on abstract rules or procedural fairness. Many of these have been surprised to discover (though it should have been no surprise) that their innovation is hardly innovative at all. The centrality of human good and well-being was taken for granted in Aristotle’s eudaimonism, Aquinas’s natural law, and even Protestant views grounding ethics in the commands of a benevolent God. This was the default position. Another cause of this shift is prominent among those commonly thought to be the theological ethicists’ enemies: philosophers and scientists who hope that the good will provide an objective, even a biological or neuropsychological, grounding for ethics by which to sidestep the pitfalls of pluralism. Regardless of the cause, 1 Elizabeth Anscombe, ‘Modern Moral Philosophy’, Philosophy 33:124 ( January 1958): 1–19 (17); J. J.C. Smart and Bernard Williams, Utilitarianism: For and Against (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 150. 1 2 john perry greater attention to the good in ethics is a welcome development, but it also raises the stakes for how we conceive the good. It is this facet of utilita- rianism that this volume explores, rather than now-wearying debates about whether it would justify the Romans feeding prisoners to the lions or public hangings of the innocent (those remain important questions, of course, especially for those about to be eaten). A related facet of utilitarianism examined in these essays is its relation to theological ethics. This is often overlooked, perhaps for the simple reason that the answer seems so obvious. What has Bentham to do with Jerusalem? The religious traditions that have most influenced the West all place significant importance on moral rules. Within such a perspective, utilita- rianism might seem to be a non-starter, and hardly even worth considering. That is too quick a dismissal, for several reasons. A focus on the good – as opposed to duty, rights, or rule-following – has a significant Christian heritage, both in patristic and medieval sources, and in twentieth-century efforts such